3.2 Mega pixel VS 4.0 Mega pixel - HELP

[Matt5L]

Is 4.0 just larger images? Lets say you only want images about the size of your comp screen or 1040 x 768 would they both have the same quality then?

Im looking at Cannon SD200 vs SD300. Is it worth the extra $100 for the SD300?

Please help me decide so I can go out and buy my camera! :D

[John_Reed]

Is 4.0 just larger images? Lets say you only want images about the size of your comp screen or 1040 x 768 would they both have the same quality then?

Im looking at Cannon SD200 vs SD300. Is it worth the extra $100 for the SD300?

Please help me decide so I can go out and buy my camera! :DSD300 photo images are 2272 pixels wide; SD200 images are 2048 pixels wide. So the SD300 images are potentially ~11% bigger in X & Y dimensions. Either one is way larger than what you need to fill a computer screen, and both give plenty of pixels for printing an 8X10, and cropping room to boot. Save your bucks - Go for the SD200!

[Newbie]

Yup John is right, if filling your background on your comp is your goal, then 2megapixels is all you need(its actually more than you need at your current resolution). So in this case, the SD200 is your best bet. Once more as he said, you'll be able to print 8x10 pics with both of them.

[Matt5L]

well i was just using that as an example. so really the 4.0 isnt nesscary for pics. im plannig on traveling and taking pics, pics of my car, friends, partys etc. so really the 3.2 is just fine?!

[Newbie]

3mp is ideal for pics of 5x7 with cropping or pics of 8x10.

[ReF]

just pics of people and cars huh? 3mp is plenty.